What do you think?
Rate this book
Loserthink: How Untrained Brains Are Ruining America
From the creator of
Dilbert
and author of
Win Bigly
, a guide to spotting and avoiding loserthink: sneaky mental habits trapping victims in their own bubbles of reality.
If you've been on social media lately, or turned on your TV, you may have noticed a lot of dumb ideas floating around.
"We know when history will repeat and when it won't."
"We can tell the difference between evidence and coincidences."
"The simplest explanation is usually true."
Wrong, wrong, and dangerous!
If we're not careful, loserthink would have us believe that every Trump supporter is a bigoted racist, addicts should be responsible for fixing the opioid epidemic, and that your relationship fell apart simply because you chewed with your mouth open.
Even the smartest people can slip into loserthink's seductive grasp. This book will teach you how to spot and avoid it--and will give you scripts to respond when hollow arguments are being brandished against you, whether by well-intentioned friends, strangers on the internet, or political pundits. You'll also learn how to spot the underlying causes of loserthink, like the inability to get ego out of your decisions, thinking with words instead of reasons, failing to imagine alternative explanations, and making too much of coincidences.
Your bubble of reality doesn't have to be a prison. This book will show you how to break free--and, what's more, to be among the most perceptive and respected thinkers in every conversation.
If you've been on social media lately, or turned on your TV, you may have noticed a lot of dumb ideas floating around.
"We know when history will repeat and when it won't."
"We can tell the difference between evidence and coincidences."
"The simplest explanation is usually true."
Wrong, wrong, and dangerous!
If we're not careful, loserthink would have us believe that every Trump supporter is a bigoted racist, addicts should be responsible for fixing the opioid epidemic, and that your relationship fell apart simply because you chewed with your mouth open.
Even the smartest people can slip into loserthink's seductive grasp. This book will teach you how to spot and avoid it--and will give you scripts to respond when hollow arguments are being brandished against you, whether by well-intentioned friends, strangers on the internet, or political pundits. You'll also learn how to spot the underlying causes of loserthink, like the inability to get ego out of your decisions, thinking with words instead of reasons, failing to imagine alternative explanations, and making too much of coincidences.
Your bubble of reality doesn't have to be a prison. This book will show you how to break free--and, what's more, to be among the most perceptive and respected thinkers in every conversation.
256 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2019
About the author
Scott Adams
247 books1,209 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name. See this thread for more information.
Adams was born in Windham, New York in 1957 and received his Bachelor's degree in Economics from Hartwick College in 1979.
He also studied economics and management for his 1986 MBA from the Haas School of Business at the University of California, Berkeley.
In recent years, Adams has been hurt with a series of debilitating health problems. Since late 2004, he has suffered from a reemergence of his focal dystonia which has affected his drawing. He can fool his brain by drawing using a graphics tablet. On December 12, 2005, Adams announced on his blog that he also suffers from spasmodic dysphonia, a condition that causes the vocal cords to behave in an abnormal manner. However, on October 24, 2006, he again blogged stating that he had recovered from this condition, although he is unsure if the recovery is permanent. He claims to have developed a method to work around the disorder and has been able to speak normally since. Also, on January 21, 2007, he posted a blog entry detailing his experiences with treatment by Dr. Morton Cooper.
Adams is also a trained hypnotist, as well as a vegetarian. (Mentioned in, "Dilbert: A Treasury of Sunday Strips 00).
He married Shelly Miles on July 22, 2006.
Adams was born in Windham, New York in 1957 and received his Bachelor's degree in Economics from Hartwick College in 1979.
He also studied economics and management for his 1986 MBA from the Haas School of Business at the University of California, Berkeley.
In recent years, Adams has been hurt with a series of debilitating health problems. Since late 2004, he has suffered from a reemergence of his focal dystonia which has affected his drawing. He can fool his brain by drawing using a graphics tablet. On December 12, 2005, Adams announced on his blog that he also suffers from spasmodic dysphonia, a condition that causes the vocal cords to behave in an abnormal manner. However, on October 24, 2006, he again blogged stating that he had recovered from this condition, although he is unsure if the recovery is permanent. He claims to have developed a method to work around the disorder and has been able to speak normally since. Also, on January 21, 2007, he posted a blog entry detailing his experiences with treatment by Dr. Morton Cooper.
Adams is also a trained hypnotist, as well as a vegetarian. (Mentioned in, "Dilbert: A Treasury of Sunday Strips 00).
He married Shelly Miles on July 22, 2006.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 392 reviews
April 26, 2020
A written-from-twitter book. It's self-help for social media. A new genre. To test it I observed Scott's interactions on twitter over the last few weeks. Well, I don't really see it working for the writer/practitioner himself.
All you need to know:
1. Don’t engage in mind reading. It isn’t a human skill.
2. Think of your ego as a tool, not your identity. Track your predictions to build up some useful humility about your worldview. Put yourself in embarrassing situations regularly to teach yourself there is no lasting pain.
3. The past no longer exists. Don’t let your attachment to the past influence your decisions today.
4. If you haven’t mentioned the next best alternative to your proposed plan, you haven’t said anything at all, and smart people would be wise to ignore you.
5. If you are arguing over the definition of a word instead of the best way forward, you are not part of the productive world.
6. If you are sure one variable is all you need to grasp a complicated topic, the problem is probably on your end.
7. Occam’s razor (the idea that the simplest explanation is usually correct) is utter nonsense in the way it is commonly employed. We all think our opinions are the simplest explanations.
8. Fairness cannot be obtained in most cases because of its subjective nature. The closest you can get is equal application of the law.
If your argument depends on that one time something happened, you do not have an argument. You have a story.
9. If your argument depends entirely on the so-called slippery slope, you don’t have much of an argument. Everything changes until there’s a reason for it to stop. Mowing your lawn is not a slippery slope to shaving your dog.
10. Coincidences usually mean nothing. And they are the fuel of confirmation bias. If your argument depends entirely on not knowing how else to explain coincidences, you have a poor imagination, not an argument. Coincidences might tell you where to look first for confirmation of a theory, but that is as far as they can go.
11. Avoid "halfpinions" that ignore either the costs or the benefits of a plan.
Halfpinion: the act of ignoring one half of a topic (either the costs or the benefits).
12. Don’t use analogies to predict. Look to causes and effects.
13. Don’t judge a group by its worst 5 percent. If you do, you’re probably in the worst 5 percent of your own group.
14. Understand the limits of expert advice, and be skeptical of experts who have financial incentives to mislead.
All you need to know:
1. Don’t engage in mind reading. It isn’t a human skill.
2. Think of your ego as a tool, not your identity. Track your predictions to build up some useful humility about your worldview. Put yourself in embarrassing situations regularly to teach yourself there is no lasting pain.
3. The past no longer exists. Don’t let your attachment to the past influence your decisions today.
4. If you haven’t mentioned the next best alternative to your proposed plan, you haven’t said anything at all, and smart people would be wise to ignore you.
5. If you are arguing over the definition of a word instead of the best way forward, you are not part of the productive world.
6. If you are sure one variable is all you need to grasp a complicated topic, the problem is probably on your end.
7. Occam’s razor (the idea that the simplest explanation is usually correct) is utter nonsense in the way it is commonly employed. We all think our opinions are the simplest explanations.
8. Fairness cannot be obtained in most cases because of its subjective nature. The closest you can get is equal application of the law.
If your argument depends on that one time something happened, you do not have an argument. You have a story.
9. If your argument depends entirely on the so-called slippery slope, you don’t have much of an argument. Everything changes until there’s a reason for it to stop. Mowing your lawn is not a slippery slope to shaving your dog.
10. Coincidences usually mean nothing. And they are the fuel of confirmation bias. If your argument depends entirely on not knowing how else to explain coincidences, you have a poor imagination, not an argument. Coincidences might tell you where to look first for confirmation of a theory, but that is as far as they can go.
11. Avoid "halfpinions" that ignore either the costs or the benefits of a plan.
Halfpinion: the act of ignoring one half of a topic (either the costs or the benefits).
12. Don’t use analogies to predict. Look to causes and effects.
13. Don’t judge a group by its worst 5 percent. If you do, you’re probably in the worst 5 percent of your own group.
14. Understand the limits of expert advice, and be skeptical of experts who have financial incentives to mislead.
March 17, 2022
I think the book has very good intentions. The power and prevalence of propaganda, and the ease of falling into an echo-chamber have both exploded in the last two decades. Twitter and Facebook seems almost intentionally designed to cause discord. Perhaps we need books like this to arm the general populace with thinking strategies to help them climb out. Much of the advice and tactics are solid enough. I just wish every other sentence wasn't dedicated to building Scott Adams' brand. A ton of the book reads like an advertisement for itself and its author, so much so I almost quit in the middle of the first chapter. And the style of the writing is so simplistic it feels insulting.
The title of the book and its overly simplistic style make it very difficult to share to those who might need it. "Here's a book that I thought you would really benefit from, it's called LOSERTHINK, and it reads like it was written for 10 year olds by an egomaniac who really wants to be the next big thing." It's a shame because I know a few people (who may be related to me) who could really use a lot of its content.
I didn't care for it, but then again I probably wasn't the target audience. I hope it goes viral and helps the people who need it.
The title of the book and its overly simplistic style make it very difficult to share to those who might need it. "Here's a book that I thought you would really benefit from, it's called LOSERTHINK, and it reads like it was written for 10 year olds by an egomaniac who really wants to be the next big thing." It's a shame because I know a few people (who may be related to me) who could really use a lot of its content.
I didn't care for it, but then again I probably wasn't the target audience. I hope it goes viral and helps the people who need it.
January 23, 2020
Once again, Scott Adams does not disappoint. I've read a mountain of psychology, neuroscientific, and sociology books in the recent past. This takes 85-90% of all those interesting data points and ideas and consolidates them down into one of the most succinct, entertaining, and practical packages concerning thought and behavior that I've yet encountered. Do yourself a favor, if you haven't had the luxury of reading much of that "mountain," glean it from this fantastic source; if you're already aware of many of the ideas in this book, revel in the pleasure of seeing someone so masterfully weave them into an accessible form for the masses.
December 20, 2019
There is a lot not to like about this book. It opens with tired climate change denial arguments (no, there was no 10 year pause, and actually, the old 1970s climate models did predict accurately how the planet heats up as CO2 traps heat in the atmosphere). The book continues with bad evolutionary psychology, and a whole host of completely unsubstantiated assertions about the world. Throughout the book Adams uses cheap rhetorical tricks to misrepresent political issues (whether abortion is murder is not just about the definition of words). In all situations Adams positions himself above the fray and he adopts a shallow kind of South Park style libertarianism as the obviously correct answer. Adams' style of rhetoric resolves around making the reader believe they were in agreement with the author all along. This he calls "hypnosis" and although it looks very transparent to me, it might work on people who don't recognize the sleight of hand (specifically motte-and-bailey).
So then, did I rate it 5 stars by mistake? I didn't. The value of a non-fiction work is in the new things you learn, the perspectives that make you think, and in the concepts you learn that crystalize and clarify things you already knew but couldn't quite identify. The bad parts you can simply and easily ignore so they don't matter.
In between the unnecessary pandering, endless attempts to maintain politically neutral (while being anything but), and tireless equivocation and empty rhetoric there are some real insights. You'll find interesting observations about the value of analogies in public discourse. About cultivating systems/habits that take you where you want to go. And on the meta level this book is instructive because it employs many techniques of persuasion ("hypnosis") that are annoying but useful to learn to recognize. There is no real point in enumerating everything I find insightful because your experience as a reader will be different. However, I am confident that you'll find --something-- that will make you go "huh!", and that's really the point of reading a book like this.
When I don't like a book I can usually think of a different book that covers the same subject material, but better. This book -- despite its many flaws -- is actually original and you're guaranteed to learn something new. That makes it worth an afternoon of your time.
So then, did I rate it 5 stars by mistake? I didn't. The value of a non-fiction work is in the new things you learn, the perspectives that make you think, and in the concepts you learn that crystalize and clarify things you already knew but couldn't quite identify. The bad parts you can simply and easily ignore so they don't matter.
In between the unnecessary pandering, endless attempts to maintain politically neutral (while being anything but), and tireless equivocation and empty rhetoric there are some real insights. You'll find interesting observations about the value of analogies in public discourse. About cultivating systems/habits that take you where you want to go. And on the meta level this book is instructive because it employs many techniques of persuasion ("hypnosis") that are annoying but useful to learn to recognize. There is no real point in enumerating everything I find insightful because your experience as a reader will be different. However, I am confident that you'll find --something-- that will make you go "huh!", and that's really the point of reading a book like this.
When I don't like a book I can usually think of a different book that covers the same subject material, but better. This book -- despite its many flaws -- is actually original and you're guaranteed to learn something new. That makes it worth an afternoon of your time.
December 20, 2019
This book was part political commentary, part self-help, and part explication of logical fallacies to avoid. Some worthwhile points, but generally dumbed-down and, like most nonfiction books of this nature, it takes a concept that could have filled 40 pages and lengthens it to 200+ through repetition and filler. There's also a lot of self-plugging going on throughout the book (mentions of other books and products and personal successes, etc.)
December 10, 2019
I got through 4 chapters of Scott Adams proposing solutions to problems I don't have. I'm not sure just who is his target audience, but it isn't me. He seems to be aiming his advice at folks who make themselves unhappy by thinking negative thoughts about other people's motives. I'm enjoying life too much to worry about what other people think, so I'm going to find another book to read.
December 14, 2020
Hot garbage. I didn't agree with most of the stuff this dude said in the first 100 pages Not a ton of real information, some stuff I was literally shaking my head at. Add to the burn pile.
April 6, 2020
Good thought provoking book! Philosophical, psychological and learned some things about to be as a person. Don't think like a loser! Some things were common sense but sometimes common isn't so common. He even talks about how there is no definition of normal. Lots of food for thought in this book and I enjoyed listening to the audiobook voiced by Scott Adams during my daily walk in this quarantine epidemic.
Through life you can put on your economic hat on or business, art, sports hat, programming etc. It's always good to learn a new subject because it gives you new perspective. Learn a new skill, go do something different!
If you find yourself really lazy and can't get out of bed, move a pinky, then the rest of your fingers, then your hand, then eventually you'll be able to get up. Baby steps. That's what Scott did in the beginning of his cartoon days, he had no idea how to be a cartoonist but day one he bought markers, and then he played and doodled for long time until he started making comics.
There's no such thing as coincidences - I partially believe that this is sometimes true, but on a spiritual side, on believing the universe has powers sometimes everything happens for a reason.
When people come up with research and findings be skeptical about it, how did they get to certain findings and insights. How many people were in the study? Was it a diverse group? How long was the study done for? Did they account for all variables? Like climate change.
I'm not interested in US politics and there was quite a bit in this book which dragged down my rating.
Through life you can put on your economic hat on or business, art, sports hat, programming etc. It's always good to learn a new subject because it gives you new perspective. Learn a new skill, go do something different!
If you find yourself really lazy and can't get out of bed, move a pinky, then the rest of your fingers, then your hand, then eventually you'll be able to get up. Baby steps. That's what Scott did in the beginning of his cartoon days, he had no idea how to be a cartoonist but day one he bought markers, and then he played and doodled for long time until he started making comics.
There's no such thing as coincidences - I partially believe that this is sometimes true, but on a spiritual side, on believing the universe has powers sometimes everything happens for a reason.
When people come up with research and findings be skeptical about it, how did they get to certain findings and insights. How many people were in the study? Was it a diverse group? How long was the study done for? Did they account for all variables? Like climate change.
I'm not interested in US politics and there was quite a bit in this book which dragged down my rating.
January 6, 2020
I heard Scott Adams talking about this book on The Knowledge Project and Sam Harris which he describes thinking strategies to avoid “Loserthink”. The introduction had me suspecting that Adam’s was going to do a poor version of Daniel Kahneman’s “Thinking Fast and Slow”. He then goes on to loosely describe thinking strategies that can be learned from: Psychology; Artist; Engineering; Economics; and History amongst other disciplines. I believe the book is poorly referenced, and Adams appropriates the work of others, such as Jonathan Haidt’s concept of post-hoc reasoning without acknowledgement nor even providing a bibliography.
Adams style of argument has me believes he is an Econ with little understanding of the affective need for relationship that people have. Adams believes people will easily move across the world to where the employment is. I don’t think he gets how connected people are to kith and kin and how reluctant they will be to leave, no matter what the price. Nor do I think he has a good understanding of addiction issues. Addiction does not make rationale sense to an Econ and that he did not consider or discuss this in his optimistic view of the future. This optimistic vision I don't share on issues such as a full employment future (provided by the capitalist invisible hand) with people being easily re-educated and moving from different careers and going to where the employment is. Noah Yuval Harari seems more realistic where he discusses the rise of the ‘useless people – people who are not only unemployed, but unemployable” (Hariri’s words not mine)’. I think this version of the future is more plausible, and as a society we must figure out how to incorporate people who experience a lifetime without paid employment as it becomes increasingly normal (read Homo Deus).
This book does have merit, and is filled with conservative advice and the penultimate chapter is worth re-reading until the techniques described become second nature. The ‘magic question’ of “state one thing you believe on this topic that you think I do not believe (p 167)?” is a useful tool for getting people to pay attention and give up assumptions about one another (hopefully leading to people together, rather than further polarisation).
I would consider this a brain chewing gum book for the in-between moments, rather than a serious work that one must read. I don’t think time reading this book is wasted, but could be better spent by the serious reader. A good starter book for those just starting out in a quest to build greater wisdom and knowledge.
Adams style of argument has me believes he is an Econ with little understanding of the affective need for relationship that people have. Adams believes people will easily move across the world to where the employment is. I don’t think he gets how connected people are to kith and kin and how reluctant they will be to leave, no matter what the price. Nor do I think he has a good understanding of addiction issues. Addiction does not make rationale sense to an Econ and that he did not consider or discuss this in his optimistic view of the future. This optimistic vision I don't share on issues such as a full employment future (provided by the capitalist invisible hand) with people being easily re-educated and moving from different careers and going to where the employment is. Noah Yuval Harari seems more realistic where he discusses the rise of the ‘useless people – people who are not only unemployed, but unemployable” (Hariri’s words not mine)’. I think this version of the future is more plausible, and as a society we must figure out how to incorporate people who experience a lifetime without paid employment as it becomes increasingly normal (read Homo Deus).
This book does have merit, and is filled with conservative advice and the penultimate chapter is worth re-reading until the techniques described become second nature. The ‘magic question’ of “state one thing you believe on this topic that you think I do not believe (p 167)?” is a useful tool for getting people to pay attention and give up assumptions about one another (hopefully leading to people together, rather than further polarisation).
I would consider this a brain chewing gum book for the in-between moments, rather than a serious work that one must read. I don’t think time reading this book is wasted, but could be better spent by the serious reader. A good starter book for those just starting out in a quest to build greater wisdom and knowledge.
November 18, 2019
This book was fun to read! I stumbled across it with no prior knowledge AT ALL about Scott Adams, Dilbert, his political commentary, or his other books.
I’m sure Scott’s voice through the book will be criticised by some, but I really enjoyed it. I laughed out loud several times. I enjoyed his writing style and will read more of his books for this reason.
Major takeaways: I love Scott Adams explanation of the ego as a tool, intertwined with his ideas on embarrassment. I also enjoyed his take on humans reading other humans minds - loserthink! I indulge in mind-reading constantly, but Scott Adams has given me sufficient fuel to begin realising when I’m doing it! I also enjoyed Scott’s positivity about the future, and pointers on how to think and how not to think in politics. LOVED the climate change stuff at the beginning. If that doesn’t make you think twice, I don’t know what will.
Throughout the book, I was able to identify some Loserthink in Scott himself, but he talks about this at the end.
People who are well-versed in some of these concepts may get a little bored at points. But I feel Scott’s voice throughout the book removed this boredom for me. I’m particularly well-versed in the past existing only in our thoughts, but I enjoyed the way Scott wrote about it enough to not skip through!
I’m placing Scott’s other books on my To-Read list!
I’m sure Scott’s voice through the book will be criticised by some, but I really enjoyed it. I laughed out loud several times. I enjoyed his writing style and will read more of his books for this reason.
Major takeaways: I love Scott Adams explanation of the ego as a tool, intertwined with his ideas on embarrassment. I also enjoyed his take on humans reading other humans minds - loserthink! I indulge in mind-reading constantly, but Scott Adams has given me sufficient fuel to begin realising when I’m doing it! I also enjoyed Scott’s positivity about the future, and pointers on how to think and how not to think in politics. LOVED the climate change stuff at the beginning. If that doesn’t make you think twice, I don’t know what will.
Throughout the book, I was able to identify some Loserthink in Scott himself, but he talks about this at the end.
People who are well-versed in some of these concepts may get a little bored at points. But I feel Scott’s voice throughout the book removed this boredom for me. I’m particularly well-versed in the past existing only in our thoughts, but I enjoyed the way Scott wrote about it enough to not skip through!
I’m placing Scott’s other books on my To-Read list!
November 25, 2019
Mildly entertaining and thought provoking. But the frequency Adams spoke highly of himself was distracting. If I didn't think he was accomplished, I wouldn't be reading his book.
December 3, 2019
Honestly just to cancel out the 1-star review that is posted before the book is even released. I'll update my review once the book actually comes out, but it is frustrating that an unreleased book has a 1-star review.
Edit now the book has actually come out: my five star rating stands. Adams presents a helpful framework for looking at the world. My one concern is that the term "loserthink" may still be too insulting to be helpful, but it's at least an attempt at communicating an important concept that I haven't heard a name for before. I highly recommend reading the book and learning what loserthink means, even if I would hesitate before using the term in interactions with friends.
Edit now the book has actually come out: my five star rating stands. Adams presents a helpful framework for looking at the world. My one concern is that the term "loserthink" may still be too insulting to be helpful, but it's at least an attempt at communicating an important concept that I haven't heard a name for before. I highly recommend reading the book and learning what loserthink means, even if I would hesitate before using the term in interactions with friends.
November 16, 2019
Not sure what everyone else is seeing in this that I'm missing...I will admit that the perspective of biased thinking is causing issues, but I don't appreciate the criticism of different beliefs that is portrayed by the author. Maybe I'll try again in the future.
Read
April 19, 2020Admirable intent, but horrible execution
I really like the idea of someone like Scott popularizing critical thing - lord knoes we need more of it. The execution of this is horrible - the examples were just awful. There are gems here, but I couldn't finish the book.
I really like the idea of someone like Scott popularizing critical thing - lord knoes we need more of it. The execution of this is horrible - the examples were just awful. There are gems here, but I couldn't finish the book.
June 17, 2020
The world is just so simple to this guy. You’re in debt, pay it off. Climate change? Not enough evidence to know one way or the other. Make sure you’re watching CNN and Fox News. You can do anything you want, especially if experts don’t think you can. Am I missing something?
This guy is so lucky that he had a hit comic strip because otherwise he would sound just like my annoying uncle at the Thanksgiving dinner, and he’d be taken just as seriously.
This guy is so lucky that he had a hit comic strip because otherwise he would sound just like my annoying uncle at the Thanksgiving dinner, and he’d be taken just as seriously.
January 4, 2020
Хубавото на интернет, е че всеки има достъп до него и може да изрази мнението си пред останалите хора. Лошото на интернет е, че всеки има достъп до него и може да изрази мнението си... В допълнение на това, медиите се научиха, че заглавията, които ядосват или плашат хората се четат и гледат много повече, поради което си служат с пресилено бомбастичен език, преувеличения и чисти лъжи, за да получат заветния клик.
И повечето хора, за съжаление, вярват - вярват, че грозния, пълен с убийства, дегенерати, войни и всяческо разделение свят, който медиите описват всекидневно отговаря на истината. И вярват, че тяхото мнение по този въпрос, което могат свободно да изразят, не само има нужда да бъде изразено, не само е най-вярното, ами всички други, които имат различно мнение са или идиоти или зли до дъното на душата си.
Скот Адамс е създателят на световноизвестния комикс за Дилбърт, в който от десетилетия се подиграва на различни грешни начини на мислене, основно свързани с работата в офис и мениджмънта в големите фирми.
Вече на достопочтена възраст, той се е заел този път не да подиграе, а само да класифицира и опише начините на мислене, които ни водят към провал в общуването с другите, в логичното мислене, в здравословния спор и като цяло отношенията ни с хората и виждането ни за света.
С простичък език той ни казва какви грешки съвсем естествено допускат хората при общуване с другите и обсъждане на сериозни теми, особено в днешния ден на постоянно политическо противопоставяне и особено в интернет... и защо и как да внимаваме да не ги допускаме.
Да, Loserthink не е предназначена толкова да ни покаже как да печелим спорове като посочваме грешките на другите, а по-скоро да ни помогне да се отървем от грешките в собственото си мислене. От това ще спечели както качеството на разговорите ни (и да, споровете) с останалите хора, така и качеството ни на мислене и на живот като цяло.
И повечето хора, за съжаление, вярват - вярват, че грозния, пълен с убийства, дегенерати, войни и всяческо разделение свят, който медиите описват всекидневно отговаря на истината. И вярват, че тяхото мнение по този въпрос, което могат свободно да изразят, не само има нужда да бъде изразено, не само е най-вярното, ами всички други, които имат различно мнение са или идиоти или зли до дъното на душата си.
Скот Адамс е създателят на световноизвестния комикс за Дилбърт, в който от десетилетия се подиграва на различни грешни начини на мислене, основно свързани с работата в офис и мениджмънта в големите фирми.
Вече на достопочтена възраст, той се е заел този път не да подиграе, а само да класифицира и опише начините на мислене, които ни водят към провал в общуването с другите, в логичното мислене, в здравословния спор и като цяло отношенията ни с хората и виждането ни за света.
С простичък език той ни казва какви грешки съвсем естествено допускат хората при общуване с другите и обсъждане на сериозни теми, особено в днешния ден на постоянно политическо противопоставяне и особено в интернет... и защо и как да внимаваме да не ги допускаме.
Да, Loserthink не е предназначена толкова да ни покаже как да печелим спорове като посочваме грешките на другите, а по-скоро да ни помогне да се отървем от грешките в собственото си мислене. От това ще спечели както качеството на разговорите ни (и да, споровете) с останалите хора, така и качеството ни на мислене и на живот като цяло.
January 30, 2020
I didn't think I would like this book, but I devoured it. There are some golden nuggets in here on persuasive techniques, how to build an argument, and how to break yourself out of plain old poor thinking. At minimum, worth a good, solid scan.
December 1, 2019
Five word review: Climate opinions are off putting
December 8, 2019
If you listen to Coffee with Scott Adams you have already heard most of this.
January 2, 2020
فکر نیندیشیده(عادت های ناکارآمد اندیشه فضای مجازی و رسانه)
June 21, 2020
“Mr. Madison, what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.”
Of course, this book was released long after the film Billy Madison. I’m sure that if this fictional Principal read the book, Loserthink, he would have come up with a similar line directed towards Mr. Adams.
Oh my goodness! I do not like to give up on books. It was the hardest thing NOT to surrender this book back to the shelves without finishing. This is the first book I have read from Mr. Adams’ collection. I enjoy his comic strips, so I assumed that I would enjoy his writing style. From the beginning, the author comes across as pretentious and condescending. If you enjoy that style of writing, this book is for you.
I did find one redeemable point worth sharing: “If you don’t know the right way to do something, try doing it wrong.” Mr. Adams points out that “when you do something the wrong way, the people who know how to do things the right way will generally jump in to tell you what you are doing wrong. Take advantage of all that free advice.”
Of course, this book was released long after the film Billy Madison. I’m sure that if this fictional Principal read the book, Loserthink, he would have come up with a similar line directed towards Mr. Adams.
Oh my goodness! I do not like to give up on books. It was the hardest thing NOT to surrender this book back to the shelves without finishing. This is the first book I have read from Mr. Adams’ collection. I enjoy his comic strips, so I assumed that I would enjoy his writing style. From the beginning, the author comes across as pretentious and condescending. If you enjoy that style of writing, this book is for you.
I did find one redeemable point worth sharing: “If you don’t know the right way to do something, try doing it wrong.” Mr. Adams points out that “when you do something the wrong way, the people who know how to do things the right way will generally jump in to tell you what you are doing wrong. Take advantage of all that free advice.”
June 2, 2020
Loserthink provides a framework for avoiding unproductive thinking.
Reading this book will help you identify your own meaningless thought patterns.
Some common ones are: mind reading (assuming you know what other people’s thoughts/intentions are), slippery slopes (a logical fallacy, eventually a counterforce stops the slipping), history “repeating itself” (Which history? When does it repeat? If you can’t use this information to predict reliably it doesn’t mean anything.), one variable projections (if everything remains equal, climate change will kill us all! Everything won’t remain equal, technology and circumstances will change in a way that few people, or no one can predict.), etc etc
I’m pretty bought in to Scott Adams’s world view so a lot of what was in this book I already agree with, however I think it will be fun to try to identify these thought patterns in the people I interact with.
If you text me some nonsense thinking, prepare yoursel for a screenshot of this book as a response. It’s gonna be hella obnoxious but hopefully it will make the world a better place.
Reading this book will help you identify your own meaningless thought patterns.
Some common ones are: mind reading (assuming you know what other people’s thoughts/intentions are), slippery slopes (a logical fallacy, eventually a counterforce stops the slipping), history “repeating itself” (Which history? When does it repeat? If you can’t use this information to predict reliably it doesn’t mean anything.), one variable projections (if everything remains equal, climate change will kill us all! Everything won’t remain equal, technology and circumstances will change in a way that few people, or no one can predict.), etc etc
I’m pretty bought in to Scott Adams’s world view so a lot of what was in this book I already agree with, however I think it will be fun to try to identify these thought patterns in the people I interact with.
If you text me some nonsense thinking, prepare yoursel for a screenshot of this book as a response. It’s gonna be hella obnoxious but hopefully it will make the world a better place.
November 29, 2019
I took it slow, since it is an idea filled book. Read a few pages, thought about it, read a few more. Most of what he says I already practice or have heard him expand on before. The bit that really stuck out at me on this first read through is his take on Privacy. I had always thought of it as an absolute, but he does a good job of pointing out that there are many instances where less privacy is better, and that we historically have not enjoyed much privacy anyway since humans evolved from small groups where everybody knows everything about you. With all the good and bad that implies. He makes a very good point about having large amounts of medical data available for study. One wall down in my mental prison. Now to work on some micro-steps.
I recommend reading it at the least for the assistance with perception shift. Perspective is a difficult thing to gain, have to put some effort into it.
I recommend reading it at the least for the assistance with perception shift. Perspective is a difficult thing to gain, have to put some effort into it.
December 31, 2021
Don't engage in mind reading
Think of your ego as a tool, not your identity
Track your predictions to build humility
Put yourself in embarrassing situations regularly to teach yourself there is no lasting pain
If you haven't said the next best alternative to your proposed plan, you haven't said anything at all
If you are arguing over the definition of a word, you are unproductive
Avoid halfpinions: only mentioning benefits or costs
Think of your ego as a tool, not your identity
Track your predictions to build humility
Put yourself in embarrassing situations regularly to teach yourself there is no lasting pain
If you haven't said the next best alternative to your proposed plan, you haven't said anything at all
If you are arguing over the definition of a word, you are unproductive
Avoid halfpinions: only mentioning benefits or costs
January 8, 2022
Certainly got me thinking
Although it talks about America in the title, the ideas in the book are applicable globally. Scott Adams (Dilbert creator) makes some great points that more flexibility in thinking, realising we are poor predictors of the future and excessive confidence in our ability to read minds are creating a lot of problems for humanity.
Definitely worth a read.
Although it talks about America in the title, the ideas in the book are applicable globally. Scott Adams (Dilbert creator) makes some great points that more flexibility in thinking, realising we are poor predictors of the future and excessive confidence in our ability to read minds are creating a lot of problems for humanity.
Definitely worth a read.
July 1, 2020
More than a little repetitive, although that may be part of Adam's hypnotic technique.
Not 100 percent persuasive, either.
But a few good tips.
Not 100 percent persuasive, either.
But a few good tips.
September 10, 2021
Fantastic book that discussed important thinking skills. Highly recommended.
August 17, 2022
Useful and funny. And sometimes repetitive but this is trivial compared to the first two qualities as the author might have said if I read his mind correctly.
January 18, 2021
Loserthink (2019) by Scott Adams is another book from the author of Dilbert. It combines advice along with tales of Adam’s life and his observations.
Adams defines ‘Loserthink’ as unproductive ways of thinking. Part of the book is describing how economics, engineers, scientists, leaders, entrepreneurs, psychologists, artists and historians think and what can be learnt from each viewpoint. It’s not a bad idea. Adams writes well and coins some new terms, including halfpinions where only the benefit or cost of something is looked at.
Adams has a list at the end of the book that summarises the book. It is :
Don’t engage in mind reading. It isn’t a human skill.
Think of your ego as a tool, not your identity. Track your predictions to build up some useful humility about your worldview. Put yourself in embarrassing situations regularly to teach yourself there is no lasting pain.
The past no longer exists. Don’t let your attachment to the past influence your decisions today.
If you haven’t mentioned the next best alternative to your proposed plan, you haven’t said anything at all, and smart people would be wise to ignore you.
If you are arguing over the definition of a word instead of the best way forward, you are not part of the productive world.
If you are sure one variable is all you need to grasp a complicated topic, the problem is probably on your end.
Occam’s razor (the idea that the simplest explanation is usually correct) is utter nonsense in the way it is commonly employed. We all think our opinions are the simplest explanations.
Fairness cannot be obtained in most cases because of its subjective nature. The closest you can get is equal application of the law.
If your argument depends on that one time something happened, you do not have an argument. You have a story.
If your argument depends entirely on the so-called slippery slope, you don’t have much of an argument. Everything changes until there’s a reason for it to stop. Mowing your lawn is not a slippery slope to shaving your dog.
Coincidences usually mean nothing. And they are the fuel of confirmation bias. If your argument depends entirely on not knowing how else to explain coincidences, you have a poor imagination, not an argument. Coincidences might tell you where to look first for confirmation of a theory, but that is as far as they can go.
Avoid halfpinions that ignore either the costs or the benefits of a plan.
Don’t use analogies to predict. Look to causes and effects.
Don’t judge a group by its worst 5 percent. If you do, you’re probably in the worst 5 percent of your own group.
Understand the limits of expert advice, and be skeptical of experts who have financial incentives to mislead.
It’s a good list, and the books way of describing things is interesting and fun. Loserthink isn’t a bad book but it’s far from great either. If Scott Adams appeals it’s worth a look.
Adams defines ‘Loserthink’ as unproductive ways of thinking. Part of the book is describing how economics, engineers, scientists, leaders, entrepreneurs, psychologists, artists and historians think and what can be learnt from each viewpoint. It’s not a bad idea. Adams writes well and coins some new terms, including halfpinions where only the benefit or cost of something is looked at.
Adams has a list at the end of the book that summarises the book. It is :
Don’t engage in mind reading. It isn’t a human skill.
Think of your ego as a tool, not your identity. Track your predictions to build up some useful humility about your worldview. Put yourself in embarrassing situations regularly to teach yourself there is no lasting pain.
The past no longer exists. Don’t let your attachment to the past influence your decisions today.
If you haven’t mentioned the next best alternative to your proposed plan, you haven’t said anything at all, and smart people would be wise to ignore you.
If you are arguing over the definition of a word instead of the best way forward, you are not part of the productive world.
If you are sure one variable is all you need to grasp a complicated topic, the problem is probably on your end.
Occam’s razor (the idea that the simplest explanation is usually correct) is utter nonsense in the way it is commonly employed. We all think our opinions are the simplest explanations.
Fairness cannot be obtained in most cases because of its subjective nature. The closest you can get is equal application of the law.
If your argument depends on that one time something happened, you do not have an argument. You have a story.
If your argument depends entirely on the so-called slippery slope, you don’t have much of an argument. Everything changes until there’s a reason for it to stop. Mowing your lawn is not a slippery slope to shaving your dog.
Coincidences usually mean nothing. And they are the fuel of confirmation bias. If your argument depends entirely on not knowing how else to explain coincidences, you have a poor imagination, not an argument. Coincidences might tell you where to look first for confirmation of a theory, but that is as far as they can go.
Avoid halfpinions that ignore either the costs or the benefits of a plan.
Don’t use analogies to predict. Look to causes and effects.
Don’t judge a group by its worst 5 percent. If you do, you’re probably in the worst 5 percent of your own group.
Understand the limits of expert advice, and be skeptical of experts who have financial incentives to mislead.
It’s a good list, and the books way of describing things is interesting and fun. Loserthink isn’t a bad book but it’s far from great either. If Scott Adams appeals it’s worth a look.
December 26, 2020
If you have read a few behavioral books, most of these concepts would not be new to you. The ending picks up the pace of value. However I did recognize some Loserthink assumptions in a few arguments made. He's a little bit too "I'm a celebrity" absorbed too. I guess you write what you feel. Overall, just OK. Win Bigly much better.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 392 reviews